Journal of Philosophy 60 (15):425-435 (1963)
|Abstract||Some features of the concept of a want, and of the explaining relation in which a want may stand to an action, have not received sufficient attention. In what follows we shall offer some suggestions and descriptions which may be one step toward remedy of this situationi. We shall be at pains to point out the extent to which the features we describe fit in with a conception of the explanations of actions conforming to the inferential (deductive or inductive) and nomological patterns of scientific explanation, and also to point out where perhaps the fit is not so snug.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Rosalind Hursthouse (1991). Arational Actions. Journal of Philosophy 88 (2):57-68.
Heath White (2011). Mattering and Mechanism: Must a Mechanistic Universe Be Depressing? Ratio 24 (3):326-339.
Peter Gl (1977). Ii. The Rationality Principle and Action Explanations: Koertge's Reconstruction of Popper's Logic of Action Explanations. Inquiry 20 (1-4):72 – 81.
Neil Levy (2005). Contrastive Explanations: A Dilemma for Libertarians. Dialectica 59 (1):51-61.
Robert D. Murray (1995). Is Davidson's Theory of Action Consistent? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 25 (3):317 - 334.
Scott J. Shapiro (2002). Ulysses Rebound. Economics and Philosophy 18 (1):157-182.
Lars Bergström (1990). Explanation and Interpretation of Action. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (1):3-15.
Theodore Mischel (1966). Pragmatic Aspects of Explanation. Philosophy of Science 33 (1/2):40-60.
Rob Vanderbeeken (2006). Can Intentional and Functional Explanations of Actions Coexist? The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 9:143-147.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads29 ( #48,084 of 722,863 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,863 )
How can I increase my downloads?